activemq-dev mailing list archives

+1 Consolidation should lead to a stronger overall product, and hopefully more active contributors
and a larger combined user base =)
On Jul 8, 2014, at 9:31 AM, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> My name is Clebert Suconic, I'm the project lead for the HornetQ JMS broker
> (http://hornetq.jboss.org/). The HornetQ team is currently in the planning
> phase for the next release of the broker and we've been thinking about
> whether it would make sense for us to collaborate more closely with the
> ActiveMQ community.
>
> There is a lot of overlap in the capabilities of the two brokers today and
> it strikes us that it would be beneficial to both communities for us to join
> forces to build one truly great JMS broker rather than spend our time
> duplicating efforts on both brokers. ActiveMQ has a great community of
> developers and users and it'd be great to be able to consolidate our work
> there.
>
> My understanding is that the Apollo sub-project aimed to provide a basis for
> the next generation of ActiveMQ, addressing some of the current limitations.
> Perhaps HornetQ could be an alternative. HornetQ has some good performance
> and scalability numbers as well as support for JMS 2.0. It already supports
> STOMP today and adding support for OpenWire would be straight-forward and
> would provide continuity for existing clients. Essentially, the goal could
> be to combine the existing flexibility of ActiveMQ with the performance of
> HornetQ.
>
> Anyway, these are just some initial ideas, for now I'm really just
> interested to know how the ActiveMQ community would feel about a donation of
> the HornetQ codebase.
>
> Thanks and best regards,
> Clebert.